Im a newb to SLR (DSLR) photography. I just upgraded from a canon point and shoot to a 400D. I have read a lot, A LOT, of lense reviews on this forum and others. I like the hundreds of newbie's before me am looking for the right answer on a lense upgrade (from the 18-55 Kit lense).

Right now im looking at either the EF 28-135mm IS USM or the EF-S 17-85 mm IS USM. I read Gordon's review of the 17-85, very nice might I add, and the canon lense comparsion review. My dilema is that many people with the 17-85 say it is overpriced for a slightly underperforming lense. I have the ability to buy the 28-135 from a friend brand new for $300 US dollars.
So the question is on the cropped body is this a deal worht passing up for something with a wider angle say the 17-55 mm, or is the 17-85 still the better option? I just want a good quality lense with enough range to help me get great shots as I learn. Knowing im not getting taken in the process...

Hi CovertOne.
Welcome to CameraLabs forums.
The answer to your question is based on your needs.
What do you like to photo?
If you like views, buildings etc, in my opinion you'll need to 17mm wide angle. I recently checked my pictures (to answer the same question for myself) and many of them were in 18mm.
If you think you won't need the wide angle, the 28-135 should be fine.
I don't know the 28-135, but the 17-85 supposed to be quite nice for a beginner.
Good luck.
Liron.

Thanks amitzil. I went ahead and bought the 28-135mm. My friend let me borrow it over the weekend, and I took some pretty cool pictures with it (nothing to brag to seasoned people about, but a lot better than my point and shoot) he even threw in a brand new Hoya UV Filter. (I know some dont use filters, but I do as I am not in a situation to risk having to buy a new lense from a scratch). Not a bad deal for $300 US.

I figure ill get a wider lense later in the year once I have a more firm feel on what focal range i like best.